2 Jul
2006
2 Jul
'06
3:28 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 15:51 -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 20:33 +0100, Bob Ham wrote:
Nope, it is (or at least was the last time I checked) mentioned in the,
I think, README file in the tarballs, up to and including 0.3.3.
-- Fernando
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 23:53 +0700, Patrick
Shirkey wrote:
Definitely, at the end of the day there is no way in hell their
"exception" would hold up in court, since they basically just mention it
in passing on the web page. Dave Robillard wrote:
According to this URL
http://cvs.linuxsampler.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/linuxsampler/src/Sampler.cp…
I have permission to use that particular file under the GPL, or (at my
option) any later version. Looking through a few other files and I see
I have the same permissions for those. Seems to be open source *and*
free software *and* released under the GPL *and* free-as-in-beer.
*shrug* On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 17:43 +0200, Luis Garrido
wrote:
>> LinuxSampler is not free software or open source software.
>>
> (sigh, must we, really?)
>
> It depends on who you choose to side with.
It's just using a modified GPL License which isn't clearly labelled as
such.